Base Hit or Fielders Choice . . .

[randkos3]

Runners are on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out, tie score.

Batter bunts (on the ground) between Pitcher and 3rd . . . Pitcher picks up the ball, looks at (holds) the runner at 3rd, then decides to hold onto the ball instead of throwing the ball to 1st - to get the batter out (not definite but probable or possible). The question is . . . would the batter be credited with a bunt single or should it be scored as a Fielders Choice.

We have our "official scorer" (pencil and Paper) and myself (with the iScore) and we compared our scorecards last night. We found we had this play twice this weekend - and both times we scored it different. Which way would you go?

(I scored it a base hit - both times.)

[Bryan D Shepherd]

As would I. I do not score a fielder's choice without a throw. A look at 3rd is not a fielder's choice. Fielder's Choice is when the fielder is making an attempt to get another runner out instead of the batter.

-Ump Bryan

ETA: Even though section C reads defensive indifference, it also says that the runner has to advance safely because of it. In your situation the runner on third did not, so it should still be scored a base hit.

[Bryan D Shepherd]

Looking at the NCAA Baseball Rulebook
10.5 Fielder's Choice reads:
This term is used by the official scorer to account for the following situations (the batter shall be charged with an official time at bat but no hit in all such situations).
a. When a batter-runner advances one or more bases while a fielder handles a fair hit attempts to put out a preceding runner.
b. When a runner advances (other than by a stolen base or error) while a fielder is attempting to put out another runner.
c. When a runner advances safely because of a defensive team's indifference (undefended steal); or
d. When a batter apparently hits safely and a runner who is forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner fails to touch the first base to which he is advancing and is called out on an appeal.

[FTMSupport]

There is another option that was not mentioned. Since there was a runner on third, and the batter bunted the ball, it can be assumed the intent was a Sacrifice. If the fielder fielded the ball and COULD have gotten the runner out at first base, but CHOSE not to throw because the runner at third would score on the throw, then it can be scored as Sacrifice Bunt - Safe. This would be scorer's judgment based on the circumstances of the play.

Scoring a Fielders Choice penalizes the batter (batting average goes down). Scoring a Hit is not correct if the batter clearly would have been thrown out at first had the fielder chosen to throw. If it is possible the runner would have beaten out a throw to first, then a Base Hit would be appropriate, but if it is a case where the batter would have been thrown out and the fielder did not throw because he wanted to hold the runner on third, then Sac Bunt - Safe is an option.

See MLB 10.08(a) and 10.08(b).

[OhioTex]

m2c . not a FC, bunt (hit) single, or sac bunt - safe. .

[randkos3]

ok - back to the game . . .

it wasn't an intentional Sacrifice Bunt, but a case where we were hoping for them to make the throw to 1st so our runner on 3rd could break for home. This play seems to be very common in our tournaments as the success rate for scoring is quite high. Our coach, when we are on defense and in this situation, usually has our girls make a hard fake throw to 1st, then turn and make a play on the runner from 3rd. It has worked a couple times, but if we throw to 1st, the runner usually beats the throw home - 9 of 10 times.

The "Sac. Bunt - safe" is something I hadn't considered. It might be the more fair way to score the play since, most times, the fielder would have been able to throw out the batter at 1st - - - and scoring it a base hit is "awarding" a hit when it's probably not deserved. I think the concensus is "Fielders Choice" can be ruled out.

Thanks for the comments, now I'll have something to discuss at practice tomorrow evening.

[OhioTex]

it sounds like you wanted it to be a sac.... so if you had the bunt sign on, and she laid it down with the intent of a sac bunt, sounds like sac bunt..

[CSThunderCoach]

I agree with Tex. If the intent of the play was to move the runner then a sacrifice it is. The fact that the runner made it to first safely was a bonus. This is another one of those "judgement" calls. If the runner on 3rd was standing on the bag when the bunt was laid down and never appeared to be interested in making it home, then I would have to say it is a "bunt for hit", but if the runner had a big lead and was just waiting for the throw to first, sac bunt - safe.

[PetroGuy]

MLB 10.08(a) only says to score it a sac bunt if there is a error. Holding onto the ball, even if there could have been a play, is not an error.

10.08(b) could apply in making this a sac, but it says only if the fielder is trying to put out a preceding runner. I think it is a judgement call as to whether the look back is really trying to put out the runner. In general I would think it is not an attempt unless the bunt is very close to the baseline and a tag is possible.

IMHO this is one of those situations where it might not seem fair, but the batter gets a single.

[Bryan D Shepherd]

Not baseball though. We're talking about softball where the baselines are 60 feet long and any hit in the infield can turn into a base hit. Sacrifice rules are much different in softball as they are in baseball.